+1
(and some filler to bring my post to the required 3 character length. )
After all these years.. Nvidia still can not SLi a 980GTX and 970GTX together..
AMD is the leader in pushing forward.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
+1
(and some filler to bring my post to the required 3 character length. )
MS always starts off internally, and then they ask IHV's to join in, the problem is it takes around 3 to 5 years of development for an API to be commercially viable. AMD on the other hand never did that much development at all with mantel, talked alot about it but never did they show what it was capable of in the real world till after Dx12 did.
Yes I did AMD helped out, but there were many other people involved with Volken well before they did not to mention there has been a lot of work done after that needed to be done. Mantel isn't a full API, it was never designed to be, it was made to coexist and run with other API's.
The only similarities between Dx12 and Mantle I can tell you for fact because I have used both, is the use of PSO's, Pixel shader objects. Its possible MS saw this with mantle and decided they could use it too, but it just so happens its the thing that AMD calls close to metal, in reality that's Marketing crap. And it so happens this is what gives improved performance over Dx11.
Your posts are ridiculous, you can't even bother to spell the API names correctly and yet you've "used both." You're trying very hard to make me think you're just making up shit as you go and / or just barfing back whatever stuff you've read elsewhere except more distorted than ever at this point. The PSO acronym in DX12 stands for pipeline state object, this is what it's referred to _everywhere_. But I guess you know this and it was just another typo? Also lol at that being the only similarity...
Here's a DX12 particle system I was playing with a few weeks back, it should run fine on an updated W10 install. I kinda "cheat" and software render the particles, but it should be pretty trivial to extend to get any 2D sprite up on screen (I just draw to a full screen sprite). It's pretty much a wall of text since I just wanted something on screen. I don't know if everything is totally correct, but it does work on actual hardware, though the included stuff creates a WARP device.
Some of it (file loading, window creation, matrix math) depends on my own utility library which I didn't include.
video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ew9swkkACA
source (and exe): https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B359Nkrkg3-5cFk5TDhZaURobGs&authuser=0
Sorry that was a mistake, yes pipeline shader object, don't know why I was thinking pixel shader.... thank you for the correction.
was thinking of VBO's
But any case PSO's are about the only thing that is similar between the two API's.
Also its hard for me to do corrections when rendering out 16k textures as it uses all my 20 cores to max when doing AO maps, when doing one texture it takes 8 hours to render out.
similar doesn't mean the same,
Dx 12 has things like indirect drawing, ROV's, and swap chains, none of these are available on Mantle.
At a high level both API's do look very similiar, but features wise Dx12 has quite a bit more.
similar doesn't mean the same,
Dx 12 has things like indirect drawing, ROV's, and swap chains, none of these are available on Mantle.
At a high level both API's do look very similiar, but features wise Dx12 has quite a bit more.
i remember Microsoft proclaiming direct x 10 will be their last version of it.
AMD made mantle an OPEN platform so what if microsoft looked at mantle as they made 12 and added their own improvements that is the point AMD had in making it open. AMD does not want to maintain the API they want to make cpu and gpu and apu that use it that is why they are doing things the way they want they are manipulating the state of gaming and everything is moving based on the bricks amd has laid.
And btw Scali is a very good programmer and if you want to directly talk to him buzz him at B3D.
MS always starts off internally, and then they ask IHV's to join in, the problem is it takes around 3 to 5 years of development for an API to be commercially viable. AMD on the other hand never did that much development at all with mantel, talked alot about it but never did they show what it was capable of in the real world till after Dx12 did.
Yes I did AMD helped out, but there were many other people involved with Volken well before they did not to mention there has been a lot of work done after that needed to be done. Mantel isn't a full API, it was never designed to be, it was made to coexist and run with other API's.
The only similarities between Dx12 and Mantle I can tell you for fact because I have used both, is the use of PSO's, Pixel shader objects. Its possible MS saw this with mantle and decided they could use it too, but it just so happens its the thing that AMD calls close to metal, in reality that's Marketing crap. And it so happens this is what gives improved performance over Dx11.
You disappointed me when you write more blah blah blah get things mixed up lets make a start.
Scali has nothing to do with the buttload of crap you posting on this forum his status does reflect on anything you wrote down.
The last overhaul of DX11 was a mere introduction of a few new features (Direct Compute) and just an optimization of DX10 features. And from the blog you posted which linked a source clearly stated that MS was not doing anything near what Mantle is. This means that even if DX12 was earlier it was not the DX12 you know of today.
About AMD helping out. AMD gave Mantle (all of it) to the khronos group (since you mentioned the Nvidia guy which you told me is there as well). Now the Khronos group youtube video clearly states 2 weeks before the committee meeting AMD came to Khronos. Khronos is very slow at adapting things. So helped out is the wrong expression even the person describing this said "hit the ground running" which is not the same thing as helped out.
If anything it just shows how stuck Khronos was at the time the person describing this said it in a manner that he was more then happy when AMD turned up with Mantle. This you might not have picked up but it is clear that these things are not mere "helping out".
Mantle can not run on its on, it has to run with another API to fully function.
You have literally no idea what you're talking about.
That stops almost no one from forming opinions.
drunk blah blah blah blah?.
Actually it would be better if you did your own looking around too. I will wait for your list and please no general Marketing swaths. I want to see API calls.
Take your time because it seems like you actually have to go read up a little. Swap chains are very important in many applications and since mantle doesn't have them you either have to another API or if in windows DXGI can handle it.
GameWorks does what Nvidia has always claimed it does: highlight features on Nvidia hardware. It's a simple concept: as a perk of buying an Nvidia GPU, game developers who choose to use feature/library/Nvidia assistance will get a benefit in exchange for feature(s) benefiting recent Nvidia cards. Whether it's optimization or IQ enhancements, it can turn out to be useful in various ways. AMD does the same damn thing. There has absolutely never been any reasonable expectation that one manufacturer will optimize the hell out of an enhancement for competitors' hardware. There's no need to sugar coat the GPU vendor help game developers receive: it's done for selfish reasons.
It's just so bizarre to see this level of cognitive dissonance. Just because AMD developer relations sucks so badly now isn't a reason to take the ball and send everyone home. AMD has critical dependence on GPU sales now that its CPU sales are in the toilet and has sold off nearly everything of value it once possessed. It sucks that AMD can no longer afford to behave like a top tier GPU maker, but that's its own fault for numerous poor decisions and legendarily bad management.
I ignored all the straw man arguments in your post because a is all they deserve.
You know, the cool thing is if Nvidia gets what they want and kills off AMD, you all will be paying out the butt for less capable hardware and stagnant advances. Well you guys are doing that, I will be using my money for more important things than to waste money on gaming that favors only one company because they are the only ones left. (I do not think AMD is going anywhere but, I have no idea for sure if that is going to be the case or not.)
Oh well, enjoy your $700 GTX 750 non Ti's. (I know that is exaggerated but not by a whole lot.)
If Nvidia "kills off" AMD, it's going to be because of AMD's poor general support. I mean, freaking seriously. They haven't released a non-Beta since last freaking year. They've only released one beta that actually really changed anything this year, crossfire support is outright abysmal for anything new right now. Almost all of their crap is massively delayed, they still haven't properly optimized Mantle for GCN 1.0, and, just bluntly, they freaking suck at supporting their own products.
I don't want Nvidia to own the market. But if they do, it's because AMD handed it to them on a silver platter.
(Full disclosure: I have an AMD videocard, which I got as my videocard after being Nvidia only forever. I am very disgruntled.)
The beta driver is a non-issue, would you feel better if they just called it Catalyst 15.4 and dropped the beta tag at the end? WHQL does not make a driver any better these days, it just costs $!
Does anyone care about who qualifies Linux drivers?
Releasing beta drivers in not an issue. Releasing ONLY beta drivers is the issue.
There is a reason they are using the term beta. It's not just a name.
You missed the point
saying BETA in front of the driver or WHQL makes no difference, except for some $$$ in MSs pocket, multiple WHQL Drivers have had serious issues in the past, EG, Nvidia killing cards with WHQL drivers.
AMD should just toss the BETA designation all together, release just "Drivers" and "WHQL" drivers, then people who do nothing but spread misinformation, will have to find another avenue for discrediting AMD. And the end user will see 0 difference in their experience, except that they might be happier, that their driver doesn't say "BETA"
By the way, at my company, we consider BETA as "GA" ready code, as in we don't go into beta with something we are not comfortable releasing to the public as a final version, and most of the time, the changes between Beta and GA are non-existent ( and we sell enterprise software)
AMD has used the term "release candidate" in the past for drivers that were closer to being ready. So sorry you had to write all that for nothing.
You're right. This is worse. This is business. Then again, don't the two often shake hands?
There's a game being played by both sides, and as a consumer you lose no matter which side you choose at this point.
AMD believes they can win you over by preaching a better world for pc gamers if technology is open. Their marketshare and influence is miniscule. They are not in a position to make this a reality, so this idealistic notion does nothing for them. One thing is for certain - whining about your competitor(s) is not viewed favorably by most people, regardless of the truth behind your words. The caveat AMD employees place on their social networking profiles of "my views are my own" is not sufficient to shield AMD from negative bias.
Nvidia is indeed run more pragmatically, and not "to the betterment of all". Their interest is in money. They have a lion's share of the market and have always operated in the best interests of themselves. However, if Gameworks was designed to sabotage AMD, this does not explain the co-development that made GTA5 run well on both sides hardware. It also doesn't explain how they managed to ruin Kepler in TW3 either. What was the goal? Push us to Maxwell cards? This was discovered more or less immediately, and people already had suspicions they abandoned optimization for previous gen cards.
This whole situation makes me disinterested with the industry as a whole, if anything. The increasing amount of games played by both sides leads me to be frustrated and wholly uninterested in participating at all.
That's how I feel. It really leaves a bad taste in my mouth and in they end I just won't buy anything from either side.
Since I own AMD hardware, no need to buy this game at all...
Since I own AMD hardware, no need to buy this game at all...
Its us Kepler users who got royally fisted, not AMD people.
Are you high? The game runs fantastically on AMD. I've had zero problems, getting 45-50 fps on High with a single 290X at 2560x1440.Since I own AMD hardware, no need to buy this game at all...
Given the shoddy state of 99% released software nowadays (esp console ports)
If find it rather ironic that video card driver release dates still get heavily scrutinized.
The Witcher 3 has had almost a gigabyte of patches in the last week or so alone.....
Since I own AMD hardware, no need to buy this game at all...
Just another ignorant guy.
How does not buying a good game because he own an AMD video card mean voting with his wallet? The Witcher 3 runs just fine on any AMD devices, even HairWorks (only need minor tweaking), a crossfire profile is coming next month. Not buying a game (that runs perfectly fine on AMD gpu) because you own AMD hardware just mean that you're a stupid brand loyalist trying to show your faith for a corporate that does not give a damn about you.by voting with his wallet, he is not being ignorant, however your response sure is.